>>11144375 I'm going to bite. Okay here is an axiom for you. If I have an apple and another apple and I line them up side by side this is either 2 apples or apples that are next to each other. Obviously it's silly to say the latter but if you say 2 apples that makes sense. So from this axiom we can produce a result like 1+1=2 or for any object x+x=2x.
So axioms are things that are so painfully obvious that they don't need to be investigated further. Look at That one Euclid's axiom for geometry. It's says something like if I have one point here and one point there I can draw a line through thoughts points or connect them (I don't recall what it actually said). How would you go on about proving that? Easy! Take a pen, place two dots on a piece of paper in any orientation you desire and draw a line that reaches one from the other. Here's the thing, you seem smart so you know for sure that you don't need a piece of paper and pen to show this works. You can imagine it. That makes it axiomatic. So why would we bother proving axioms if we know that they work irrefutably?
